United States v. Journey
| Decision Date | 01 March 1973 |
| Docket Number | No. 72-1703.,72-1703. |
| Citation | 474 F.2d 1003 |
| Parties | UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Ronald JOURNEY, Appellant. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit |
No brief was filed by appellant.
Daniel Bartlett, U.S. Atty., and Wesley D. Wedemeyer, Asst. U. S. Atty., St. Louis, Mo., on brief for appellee.
Before LAY and BRIGHT, Circuit Judges, and NICHOL, District Judge.*
This is an appeal from the denial of post-conviction relief sought by a federal prisoner under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The petitioner asserts that his plea of guilty was not voluntary on the grounds that there were extraneous coercive circumstances which motivated his plea. The district court denied petitioner a hearing because his petition was too vague and was stated in conclusory terms. We affirm. In addition to the conclusory nature of the petition, other reasons appear on appeal which justify denial of relief. The circumstances stated in petitioner's brief on appeal allege different facts and conclusions than stated in his petition; additionally, petitioner has failed to allege facts which, if true, would entitle him to relief. Procunier v. Atchley, 400 U.S. 446, 91 S.Ct. 485, 27 L.Ed.2d 524 (1971). Many extrinsic circumstances may serve as motivation for a defendant to enter a plea of guilty and forego a jury trial. However, where the record demonstrates that a factual basis exists for the plea, that at the time of the guilty plea the defendant admitted that it was voluntarily and freely given without promises, and that Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11 was given full compliance, the petitioner then faces an uphill climb to overcome the consequences of the plea. As we observed in Langdeau v. South Dakota, 446 F.2d 507, 509 (8 Cir. 1971):
1
Judgment affirmed.
* Sitting by designation.
1 In the present case, petitioner was represented by counsel at the time his guilty plea was made.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Thompson v. United States, CR. 09-40129-01-KES
..."contentions that in the face of the record are wholly incredible" are entitled to summary dismissal); see also United States v. Journey, 474 F.2d 1003, 1003-04 (8th Cir. 1973); Sanders v. United States, 341 F.3d 720, 722 (8th Cir. 2003). These defects aside, it is unclear what professional......
-
Smith v. State
...210 N.W.2d 678 (1973), Pauley v. State, 487 S.W.2d 565 (Mo.1972), Roberts v. State, 476 S.W.2d 490(3) (Mo.1972) and United States v. Journey, (8th Cir., 1973), 474 F.2d 1003. As indicated, we rule that 'the files and records of the case conclusively show that the prisoner is entitled to no ......
-
Sund v. Young
...are entitled to summary dismissal); see also Sanders v. United States, 341 F.3d 720, 722 (8th Cir. 2003); United States v. Journey, 474 F.2d 1003, 1003-04 (8th Cir. 1973). Because Sund cannot demonstrate that Rogers' representation fell below the standard required by Strickland or that he s......
-
United States v. Hester, 73-1528.
...at 626 (1969). In addition, a hearing is not required where the motion is stated in vague and conclusory terms. See United States v. Journey, 474 F.2d 1003 (8th Cir. 1973). With these considerations in mind, Hester's claims will be considered 1. Unlawful Arrest. Although Hester claims that ......